I have been asked to prepare a recommendation for my director concerning the ethical pros and cons for acquiring a certain collection.
Let me start by giving some background. Another museum in our state has lost significant storage space and is unable to care for a large archeological collection that it purchased over 10 years ago. They have asked us if we would like to acquire this collection. They would donate it to us. After reviewing the collection, it does meet our mission, it is in good shape, and we do have plenty of storage space to house it.
There is an ethical and legal issue, however. The individual that they purchased the collection from was a pot-hunter (putting it delicately) who collected during the 1950s. I am concerned about ownership, because no one can guarantee that he always collected with permits/permission. He is no longer alive, so we can't ask him questions about the collection.
Here is my problem. On one hand, we do not want to accept this collection, because we do not want to acquire anything that the title of ownership is not clear. We also do not want to accept it because we do not want to portray an image to the community that we approve of commercial collecting. On the other hand, this collection is scientifically important. It was collected over 50 years ago and many of the sites are now extinct. We would like to see it remain in our state, because of the significant cultural heritage it holds (for our state). The other museum does not have the capabilities to care for this collection any longer and we are the only institution that is able to accept it in our state.
So... I would like to ask if anyone has had to deal with this sort of a problem. If we did accept the collection, what suggestions do you have that we could do to protect ourselves? Are there other arguments that you can suggest that we consider? Contact me on or off-list.
Thanks,
Susan